Download - Master Plan Deliverables
Master Plan
City of CharlottetownSimmons Sport Centre Complex
2013
-202
2
KenDesRoches
1Master Plan Deliverables
Project RequirementsRFP outlined key deliverables:
Condition Assessment of the Simmons Complex;
Assessment of utilization, user profiles and needs;
• A City-wide assessment of ice and/or outdoor pool needs was not within the brief/requirements for this project.
1
2
Project Requirements
Establish vision for the future of the Complex based on: Assessment of community and user
needs via market research, extensive stakeholder and public consultations;
Projected demographic changes and trends in sports participation.
Establish short to medium-term (1-5 yrs.) and long-term (6-10 yrs.) strategic directions for development of the Complex inclusive of capital project priorities.
3
4
2 State of the Complex
2012 Condition Audit: The Arena Arena building generally well maintained (40
yrs. old);
Lacks many modern amenities that would be included in a new building;
With the same level of maintenance and equipment replacement, building systems should perform satisfactorily over the next 5 years +;
But, significant maintenance/repair issues exist (movement of the rink slab, building envelope issues).
2012 Condition Audit: The Arena Investment will maintain the facility at a
progressively lower (relative) level of quality compared to a state of the art efficient modern facility;
Significant Investment in facility as a single-pad venue should not be an option.
Pool and related systems in poor condition;
Exterior slab-on-grade outside the canteen and pool change rooms is extensively cracked;
Pool mechanical equipment is 38-years-old and should all be replaced;
Pool is beyond functional life; patching should not be an option; in-situ replacement of pool and mechanical system required.
2012 Condition Audit: The Pool
Wear of sports fields is worse in the normal high use areas. Some fields are operating at or over capacity (e.g. Simmons Main and Colonel Gray);
Fields appear to drain well with the exception of some localized water ponding;
The grass is in fair condition, with the best turf being on Simmons Main Field;
There are no changing or washroom facilities for the sports fields.
2012 Condition Audit: The Sports Fields
3 The Vision
Simmons as a Complex: Simmons Sport
Centre and fields considered part of a broader Community campus;
Functionally integrated into the activities and facilities of the surrounding schools;
Design options look holistically at the improved functionality of the entire campus.
What We HeardAlmost 50% of online respondents indicated they were little to moderately satisfied with the current Simmons facility (ranking from 3-5) .
Breakdown of Consultation Process:
Stage 1: Over 24 In‐depth Interviews w/ Key Stakeholders (e.g. User Groups)
Stage 2: Public Input Session to Guide Master Plan VisionOnline Public Survey (promoted on City website and via news release) – 69 Respondents
Stage 3: Public Meeting to Review Draft Master Plan (Option)
Advertised via hand delivered flyer to all households within 100 m.
What We Heard Wide range of needs/aspirations voiced; Yet, consensus on several key aspects of
future vision:
Enhance its community focus;
Maintain/enhance opportunities for active recreation and intensive field use (e.g. investing in artificial field turf); and
Expanding opportunities for passive recreation on-site.
12
3
What We HeardResult: Ambitious;
Somewhat conflicting (or at least challenges concept of complementarity);
Nevertheless clear.
4Concepts &Related Capital CostsPreamble:
An iterative process followed whereby a range of options responding to community vision are balanced with capital cost implications of the suite of desired changes.
The Result:A likely sustainable framework for long-term planning.
Option 1: Maintain Status Quo
Issues for ConsiderationShort-term costs provide a 1-5 year strategy for the improvement of the Complex in light of policy gap regarding future City-wide ice needs.
Doesn’t address changing community needs, long-term infrastructure planning or highest and best use for the site.
Costly price tag for ensuring status quo for next 10 yearsNegative cost-benefit ratio.
No new initiatives on-site; Maintenance/enhancement of
current facilities; Includes a rebuilt pool in-situ and
moderate capital enhancements to arena in years 1-5;
Does not address long-term viability of arena building (i.e. 10-15 years from now);
Does not offer realistic solution to long-term ice needs in City.
Short-term (1-5 yrs.) investment in required and desirable capital repairs and upgrades to arena and fields;
Pool rebuilt in-situ; Longer-term (6-10 years)
upgrades to existing arena to significantly extend useful life coupled with additional ice-pad (i.e. twinning).
Option 2: Traditional Recreation Footprint
Issues for ConsiderationMeets the needs of principal users – field sports and ice user groups best if facility twinned.
Outstanding policy & strategic questions as to merits of twinning arena (pending assessment of City-wide ice needs).
Cost of fully upgrading arena and add second pad is only marginally less expensive than the cost of building a new twin pad at Greenfield site ($14.4 M to $15 M).
Option 3: Investing in First Class Complex Emphasis on sports
infrastructure at community level;
New Pool in-situ; note in all scenarios, option for alternatives to finalize pool should be investigated (for example a wading pool/splash-pad structure);
Development of Simmons Main Field with artificial turf, appropriate fencing;
Arena decommissioned pursuant to a presumed future policy strategy of ice replacement in City; and
Multi-use community centre.
Option 3: Investing in First Class Complex
Issues for Consideration
Decommissioning of the arena must occur in the context of Council-approved strategies for facilities development and growth planning. Decommissioning arena is likely warranted in medium-term.
Invests in sports fields and meets significant community and school interest in field utilization. Opportunity for an alternative range of uses in a neighbourhood setting.
Synergy between intensive field use and passive recreation.
Investment in integrated trails and pick-up use sport courts; and
Network of active loops/trails and social spaces (gazebos).
Order of Magnitude Capital Costs (2013 $) by OptionLong Term Build-Out*
Development Area/Item Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
A1 Capital Upgrades to Existing Facilities and Infrastructure (Years 1 - 5) (all-in costs) - Arena $2,399,550 $2,399,550 $113,300 - Pool $961,500 $961,500 $961,500 - Fields $85,000 $85,000 -
A2Optional Long Term Upgrade to Arena**
$4,000,000 $4,000,000 -
B Arena Twinning (Allocation) - $8,000,000 -
B2 New Arena (Greenfield Location) (Optional) - - - - Single Pad*** - - $8,000,000 - Twin Pad*** - - $15,000,000C Conversion to Artificial Turf Field - - $1,500,000
D Multi-Use Centre
- Building (Allocation) - - $1,000,000 - External Development - - $432,500 - Multi-Use Court (x1) - $66,250
E Multi-use Trails/Walkway Connections - - $273,250
Sub-Total Construction Cost Estimate $7,446,050 $15,446,050 $4,346,800 Soft Costs (20%) Included Included $846,700 Grand Total $7,446,050 $15,446,050 $5,193,500
Short Term Costs (Years 1-5) $3,446,050 $3,446,050 $113,300
* Excludes decommissioning, demolition and off-site disposal costs as applicable** Estimate of additional CapEx to significantly extend service life and functional quality of arena *** Costs not reflected in construction estimates for Option 3
The 5-year Plan In the short-term (1-5 years), Option
1 represents an immediate actionable strategy focused on maintaining the status quo.
Option 3 (minimal costs years 1-5) only relevant if decommission of Simmons is planned.
We do not recommend adopting Option 3 for expediency in years 1-5 without making a policy decision on the future of Simmons Arena.
Arena should receive some $2.5 M minimum investment in the next 5 years if plan is to retain it for next 10 years.
5
The 5-year Plan The 5-year plan assumes arena is
retained, for which needed repairs and upgrades must be undertaken to extend its life, and improve its quality markedly in the short-term.
Minimum investment of $3.5 million estimated.
Further investment over the longer-term (totaling $4 million) could ensure its life for a further 20+ years (not recommended).
6The Longer-term Plan Options 2 and 3 represent the longer-term
plan for the development of Simmons;
Immediate Action: A decision between these two options will be dependent on the results of City-wide recreation planning exercise inclusive of an ice needs and open-air pool needs assessment;
Option 2 (retaining and twinning the arena over the longer-term) totals $12 million in additional investment over years 6-10 yrs.;
Option 3 achievable over the long-term at a cost of $5.1 million. However, cost of replacing decommissioned ice elsewhere in City should be recognized, but not ascribed to this project.